Greetings,
I just read your article, "More On The Newtown Massacre" and it prompted some thoughts on conspiracism. https://
Yesterday, I came across a book review by David Ray Griffin in which he deemed it necessary to tell 9/11 Truthers that global warming is not a hoax but a scientific reality. http://www.
At the outset, let me be clear: I have no problem believing that people in positions of government authority are often malignant and malicious -- even "satanic" -- people.
Consequently, I do not doubt "conpiratorial thinking" on grounds that it could undermine my faith in "authority."
Religiously, I grew up a Catholic infallibilist but am one no longer. https://en.wikipedia.
Politically, I have been "aboard" Ramsey Clark's "ship" since before he set sail.
Politically, I have been "aboard" Ramsey Clark's "ship" since before he set sail.
Similarly, I acknowledge that The Official Story of 9/11 is saturated with inconsistences, contradictions and "inexplicabilities."
In brief, I do not believe The Official Story.
However, I also note that "Truther" explanations of these "inexplicabilities" are "all over the map," sprawling "six ways from Sunday," so that the very ramification of "views" bodes never-ending, fractious dispute as unresolvable as The Protestant Reformation.
In brief, I do not believe The Official Story.
However, I also note that "Truther" explanations of these "inexplicabilities" are "all over the map," sprawling "six ways from Sunday," so that the very ramification of "views" bodes never-ending, fractious dispute as unresolvable as The Protestant Reformation.
The Essence of Religious Fanaticism
(Emo Philips cuts to the quick of religious mania)
In the case of The Sandy Hook Massacre (Bataclan, Pulse, Aurora et al) the demonstrable fact that support for Second Amendment rights spikes after every
To suggest that the purpose of "crisis acting" is to topple The Second Amendment strikes me as conservative balderdash.
Indeed, at the structural level, I see that the meta-level upshot of most conspiracy theories is to nourish right-wing agendas that undermine the democratic process set in motion by The European Enlightenment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Taking a more narrow view, a great many Christian "conservatives" are itching for "The King's Dominion" and are thus predisposed to the restoration of monarchy/autocracy.
It is why they elected "The Deplorable One."
***
Is democracy better than monarchy/autocracy? I do not know.
At minimum, I urge anti-democratic monarchists (and other "evangelizing" autocrats) to profess their true intent.
I am not surprised that broad swathes of anti-Semitism, pro-Hitlerism, white supremacy, unregulated weaponry, generalized right-wing deconstructionism and pro-Putinism characterize "the conspiratorial mind."
To put "all" my cards on the table, I believe that contemporary "conservatism" is as monstrous as the utterly foul person whom "conservatives" elected last November - a dyed-in-the-wool conspiracist whose supposed "billionaire populism" rallied many conspiratorial thinkers to his morally-and-politically putrescent "cause" - not that sobmf ever had a "cause" apart from his narcissistic, megalomaniac self.
It also bears mention that although I advocate gun regulation, neither I -- nor anyone I know -- supports Second Amendment abolition.
No one. Nadie. Niente. Nemo.
To the contrary.
I support the Second Amendment.
Furthermore, a recent MoveOn petition to abolish The Second Amendment garnered a paltry 2500 signatures.
But back to David Ray Griffin...
Do you know if he has pronounced on the Sandy Hook massacre?
It's a question that begs asking.
It's a question that begs asking.
Thanks for your attention.
I look forward to your reply.
Pax
Alan
PS I correspond with a conspiracist who blogs as The Thinking Housewife.http://www.
In recent years, "Housewife's" reflex is to promote every newly-hatched conspiracy theory within hours of firearm carnage.
Simultaneously -- "good Catholic" that she is -- "Housewife" advises her readers to avoid "The Keepers: Who Killed Sister Cathy?"
If you have not seen this 7 hour, 7 episode made-f0r-Netflix investigative documentary, it is a model of how alleged conspiracies should be investigated: looking at all the evidence, making no absolutely certain claims in the absence of rigorous proof, bringing contrary evidence to light and analytical scrutiny to bear.
Insofar as "Housewife" is a devout Catholic she also squares neatly with your "conspiracy disbelief profile" as someone who would be profoundly unsettled if a persuasive case were made that Catholic hierarchs had colluded in the concealment and prolongation of hideous sexual abuse involving children, a circumstance that is widely documented and acknowledged by the church itself.
Similarly, the priest who plays a central roll in "Who Killed Sister Cathy" -- "Reverend" Joseph Maskell -- is considered a "bad sexual actor" by everyone, including the local diocese which, understandably, is not eager to trumpet his vility but instead has settled innumerable cases out of court.
Many critics of "Who Killed Sister Cathy?" are quick to point out that DNA from Maskell's recently-exhumed body did not match crime scene DNA while conveniently ignoring a fundamental hypothesis of the documentary which, from the beginning, posits very low probability that Maskell himself was the murderer.
Instead, "Who Killed Sister Cathy?" probes (and documents) far greater likelihood that several other (named) people were "put upon" by Maskell to do his dirty work.
In terms of personal experience, I will mention that I grew up in Rochester, New York, where a sexually abusive priest, Father Robert Winterkorn (who happened to be my pre-Vatican II confessor), was diddling the girl who lived across the street. http://www.bishop-
On a lighter note... You may know the quip: "Abstinence makes the church grow fondlers."
In recent years, "Housewife's" reflex is to promote every newly-hatched conspiracy theory within hours of firearm carnage.
Simultaneously -- "good Catholic" that she is -- "Housewife" advises her readers to avoid "The Keepers: Who Killed Sister Cathy?"
If you have not seen this 7 hour, 7 episode made-f0r-Netflix investigative documentary, it is a model of how alleged conspiracies should be investigated: looking at all the evidence, making no absolutely certain claims in the absence of rigorous proof, bringing contrary evidence to light and analytical scrutiny to bear.
Insofar as "Housewife" is a devout Catholic she also squares neatly with your "conspiracy disbelief profile" as someone who would be profoundly unsettled if a persuasive case were made that Catholic hierarchs had colluded in the concealment and prolongation of hideous sexual abuse involving children, a circumstance that is widely documented and acknowledged by the church itself.
Similarly, the priest who plays a central roll in "Who Killed Sister Cathy" -- "Reverend" Joseph Maskell -- is considered a "bad sexual actor" by everyone, including the local diocese which, understandably, is not eager to trumpet his vility but instead has settled innumerable cases out of court.
Many critics of "Who Killed Sister Cathy?" are quick to point out that DNA from Maskell's recently-exhumed body did not match crime scene DNA while conveniently ignoring a fundamental hypothesis of the documentary which, from the beginning, posits very low probability that Maskell himself was the murderer.
Instead, "Who Killed Sister Cathy?" probes (and documents) far greater likelihood that several other (named) people were "put upon" by Maskell to do his dirty work.
In terms of personal experience, I will mention that I grew up in Rochester, New York, where a sexually abusive priest, Father Robert Winterkorn (who happened to be my pre-Vatican II confessor), was diddling the girl who lived across the street. http://www.bishop-
On a lighter note... You may know the quip: "Abstinence makes the church grow fondlers."
"Crackpot Conspiracy Flick"
The Thinking Housewife
http://www.thinkinghousewife.
"Who Killed Sister Cathy?" Tom Nugent
1.) https://insidebaltimore.
2.) https://www.romper.com/p/
3.) http://www.baltimoresun.
PPS I will conclude with a general misgiving about the "mindset" of "career" conspiracists.
Any "big event" generates enough "data" that it is always possible to locate dozens, if not hundreds, of "data points" that lend themselves to conspiratorial thinking, particularly when conspiracists focus disproportionately on the botched information that typifies "foggy" reportage in the immediate wake of any catastrophic event.
We also know from controlled study that 30% of "eyewitness testimony" is false. Judge friend Lonnie C assures me that eyewitness testimony is now taken with a large grain of salt. http://paxonbothhouses.blogspo
Then there are misleading reports in which there are no eye witnesses - at least none to testify directly to the crux of "the claim."
"Jesus' body was spirited away by the women who first arrived at the tomb."
"Your spouse had a romantic tryst on a day you cannot, with certainty, account for her whereabouts."
Columbine was a hoax. https://sites.google.
Or take "pizzagate," a conspiracy theory so bizarre that even Alex Jones retracted it, although he has not yet reneged on his promotion of "NASA-Sponsored Child Slavery On Mars."
Alex Jones Obliges NASA To Deny It's Running A Child Slave Colony On Mars
In keeping with our nature, we humans seek meaningful patterns.
And, by God, one way or another we will find such patterns, particularly when our core credos depend on their identification.
Consider "Baron Trump's Marvelous Underground Journey." http://
And, by God, one way or another we will find such patterns, particularly when our core credos depend on their identification.
Consider "Baron Trump's Marvelous Underground Journey." http://
While some "conspiratorial" patterns eventually get peer-reviewed traction, it is generally true in the sprawling swamp of conspiracy theorization that conspiracists thrive by cherry-picking data while simultaneously ignoring contrary information (often far more voluminous).
It is also commonplace to dismiss conspiracy-naysayers by denigrating them as oppositional "infidels" - misinformed, manipulated or downright mendacious.
Authentic scientific scrutiny depends on earnest determination to prove one's own findings wrong - a far cry from conspiratorial "confirmation bias" which amasses voluminous data for the sole purpose of proving oneself right.
Authentic scientific scrutiny depends on earnest determination to prove one's own findings wrong - a far cry from conspiratorial "confirmation bias" which amasses voluminous data for the sole purpose of proving oneself right.
A number of ancient Greeks - Epictetus among them - encouraged us to distrust what we think we know and at times encouraged us to believe NOTHING we have not personally experienced in our own lives.
While there is much to recommend doubt and "suspension of judgment," it is also true (or so I believe) that if we doubt everything -- bus schedules, the dependability-and-
It is also true that by using sheer logic we can provably demonstrate the truth of many manifest absurdities.
For example, "missiles" --- arrows, bullets, ICBMs --- never reach their destination since every moving object travels half the distance to its goal; then half the distance again; etcetera ad infinitum.
And since, logically, space is always subdivisible by half, missiles never reach their destination.
And since, logically, space is always subdivisible by half, missiles never reach their destination.
Except that they always do.
***
When communicating with conspiracists I always let them know that I will post -- unedited and entire -- any conspiratorial writing they send me. I also encourage them to reciprocate.
Notably, no conspiracist has ever "taken me up" on this offer.
My Friends' Devoted Conspiracism Is As Crazy As Trump's Birtherism. What To Do With Lunacy?
My Attempt To Persuade A Loved One To Abandon Conspiracy Theories
"More On The Newtown Massacre": Professor David Ray Griffin And The Swamp Of Conspiracism
http://paxonbothhouses.blogspo
Discussion With 9/11 Truther Friend About Epistemology, Belief, Certainty And Purpose
The 9/11 Truth Movement: Where Does It Lead?
Conspiracy Thinking, The Death Of Shared Identity And The Collapse Of Common Purpose
Conspiracy Thinking, The Death Of Shared Identity And The Collapse Of Common Purpose
No comments:
Post a Comment